followed tags: 162
followed domains: 1
badges given: 0 of 0
member for: 1202 days
I started taking an acting class this semester just for something to do/trying something new/ meeting new people. I had no idea I would benefit from it this much. When I took theatre in high school, I was way too focused on being nervous about performing in front of people. At 24, that really doesn't bother me any more and I am able to focus on the acting itself. It is incredibly therapeutic. In our day-to-day lives, we spend so much time talking ourselves down from intense emotions that to have to push yourself to feel a particular emotion, especially an unpleasant one, is incredibly difficult. Once you practice enough and do it though, it is so rewarding. Sometimes I like to take hallucinogens as a way to explore my own mind, and I have found this class to be as therapeutic (but in a slightly different way.) Nothing could have prepared me for how intense it was going to be, but I am so glad I threw myself in. It has made me decide I want to pursue it consistently as a hobby, and I definitely recommend that anybody else try it out too.
I know this might sound ridiculous, and this definitely isn't the only thing you should be doing, but whenever I have a breakup with someone, I find it really comforting to remind myself that it is okay to feel this way now and that I'll feel much better in a month, a week, or even a few days, and just need to stick it out a bit.
Your last comment was interesting to me, although not for the purposes of the original thread. I can understand what you are saying in a more formal setting, but let's say, for example, if there is a school science project or even a group of friends deciding where to go for dinner, and nobody is taking initiative or making any executive decisions. Oftentimes if someone makes a decision, people automatically start taking that person's lead and asking them how they want things to go. Do you object to someone making this type of first move?
Room for one more?
The problem I have with this article is that, even if I were to agree (which I might, I am not convinced either way) that it makes more sense to explain patterns of irrationality as overall character flaws instead of explaining each idea in terms of the individual situation that led to it... why does it matter? Obviously people believing crazy things matters, but at the end of the day the way to address it is mostly the same. You educate people and address the points they make, regardless of whether or not it was their points that originally persuaded them or simply the people and ideas they were surrounded by. Just calling it a "character flaw" doesn't really seem to help anybody. If anything, is a somewhat defeatist attitude.
There isn't much one can do with this. It asserts that there are certain ways men and women "should" behave without giving any reason for why that is the case. It just appears to assume that the reader will take it all at face value.